Personnel training costs represent a significant expense for most businesses and governments. Part of this expense derives from the time taken to train or mentor a new trainee by an experienced worker. The experienced worker is typically not as productive with his or her other job responsibilities when training a new trainee. The longer the length of time it takes to train a new trainee, the higher the costs to the business.
Another personnel training cost many organizations face involves the cost of using equipment for training purposes. Oftentimes such equipment is prohibitively expensive to operate solely for training purposes and training is therefore combined with the productive use of the equipment. Combining the training of personnel with the productive use of expensive equipment generally has two significant drawbacks. One is that the equipment, similarly to the experienced worker conducting the training, is not used as efficiently as it usually is when not being used for training. Extra time taken by the experienced worker to explain the operation of the equipment and to guide the new trainee diminishes the efficiency by which the equipment is typically used. The second is that training must wait until opportunities arise in which the expensive equipment can be productively used for normal purposes in addition to being used for training purposes. Waiting for opportunities to concurrently productively use and train with the equipment can significantly prolong the length of time it takes to effectively train new personnel.
One solution to the above problems of training new personnel to use or work with expensive equipment is to use a training simulator. A training simulator ideally allows the new trainee to learn how to use the expensive equipment the trainee will use on the job at a fraction of the cost of using the expensive equipment for training purposes. Generally, the more expensive the equipment used on the job, the more expensive the simulator must be to mimic the functionality of the expensive equipment. The cost of a training simulator is recouped by an organization over time through the savings resulting from each new trainee trained not having to use the expensive equipment for training purposes. The more trainees the organization can train through the training simulator the quicker the cost of the simulator is recouped. The length of time it takes to train a trainee using a training simulator is reduced compared to having to wait to use actual equipment.
Many small to medium companies which use expensive equipment have too small a number of potential trainees to justify the costs of purchasing a training simulator. Companies in this situation are often forced to engage the services of a simulator company which offers the use of training simulators on a fee per use basis. Additionally, the larger and more complex a simulator must be to mimic the functionality of the expensive equipment, the less likely it is that the simulator is easily transportable. Transporting personnel to a remote location for the purpose of training with a training simulator is another cost incurred by the organization in the training of new personnel.
Transportable training simulators which can be transported to a training site are a solution to the costs of transporting personnel to a remote location to train with a fixed-site training simulator. Transportable training simulators which travel on the public highways must meet the same state regulatory criteria as other vehicles of similar size and weight. Preferably, a transportable training simulator is not so large that it requires a wide-load or other special permit before being transported. Transportable training simulators are usually housed in a standard sized tractor trailer to avoid the costs and hassle of obtaining special permits from each state the trailer travels through.
A typical consequence of using standard sized trailers to transport a training simulator to a training site is that the training simulator must either be removed from the trailer and assembled at the training site or else fit and operate within the standard sized trailer. Removing the training simulator from the trailer and assembling the simulator outside of the trailer allows the assembled simulator to be much larger than the interior dimensions of the trailer. However, unloading a simulator from a trailer and assembling the simulator within a building or other fixed structure typically involves much labor and can take weeks or months for large simulators. Prior art simulators which operate within a trailer typically require trainees to wear head mounted displays (HMDs). Simulators which are contained within a standard sized non-expandable trailer are also typically too small to contain a mock cabin or other training structure large enough to accommodate several interacting crew members.
Training simulators generally contain image generating computers which produce images of a virtual landscape or work area by either presenting the images on a large screen or by presenting the images onto a heads mounted display (HMD) which is worn by the trainee. Images are typically presented on a large screen by either projecting the images onto a screen having a gray background or by using a conventional visual display unit, such as a monitor or television unit. As a practical matter, visual display units are limited in size to the largest television sets sold by electronic manufacturers. Visual display units typically have a frame which surrounds and protects a glass screen that the images are projected through. When multiple visual display units are oriented side by side to display a larger image, the frames create a discontinuity in the image projected by the screens. Such discontinuities in the image tend to diminish the sense of immersion the training simulator is expected to create.
HMDs are usually less expensive than a collection of visual display units but cause a similar diminished sense of immersion as do the visual display units. The basic disadvantages of the HMDs are the small field of view and lower resolution compared to projection or display based systems. This causes a significant reduction of peripheral vision available to the trainee and an observable pixilation of the virtual scene. HMDs are further disadvantaged by the typical tether which connects the HMDs to the computer image generators. Such HMDs tend to limit the free movement of trainees during training as well as tending to delay the updating of images in response to a head movement of the trainee, both of which diminish the sense of immersion into the training simulation. HMDs also tend to limit the ability of trainees to interact with one another in a multi-person training simulation.
An important aspect of many training simulations is the ability of a trainee to interact with physical items or controls within a mock cabin or work environment. HMD-based simulators severely restrict the ability of a trainee to interact with physical items within the training simulation because the display of the HMD does not show the physical items within the simulator. An HMD-based simulator may even result in the trainee learning bad habits, due to the inability of trainee to interact a with realistic physical model of the structure the simulator is supposed to emulate. Trainees training in an HMD-based simulator also miss out on the opportunity to develop muscle memory from repeating training tasks which involve interaction with the physical structure of the simulator without separating themselves from the virtual scene by looking out from an HMD display.
These and other considerations have led to the evolution of the present invention.